Saturday, December 08, 2012

Down in the laid-back land of “Dominican time,” the drama surrounding the Yankees is far removed from the mind of the team’s youngest starting infielder and best all-around player. That may change by next winter, however, when Robinson Cano becomes the top free agent in baseball.

According to two industry sources familiar with Cano’s situation, the Yankees’ Gold Glove second baseman may very well bolt the Bronx once he becomes a free agent.

“I don’t think he’ll be with the Yankees beyond next season,” one of the sources told the Daily News. “He’s not giving them a hometown discount, and they seem to be more interested in keeping their payroll down than winning.”

Although Cano, who attended the celebrity golf tournament sponsored by David Ortiz this weekend at the Dominican Cap Cana resort, told the Daily News that he would “love” to remain a Yankee for life, he also added: “I know this is a business. . . . It’s up to them.”

Compounding matters for the Yankees is the fact that Cano is represented by super agent Scott Boras, who was responsible for both Alex Rodriguez’s then-record $252 million deal with Texas before the 2001 season, and the 10-year, $275 milion pact A-Rod signed with the Bombers in 2007. The new fiscal belt-tightening by Hal Steinbrenner — the Yankees have said they will get their payroll to $189 million by 2014 to avoid a massive luxury-tax hit — will be a factor.

Another baseball source suggested that Cano will seek a deal similar to A-Rod’s, one that has become an albatross for the Bombers, who might be hesitant to tie up that much money and that many years in Cano, 30.

“He knows he’s the best player on the Yankees,” the second source said of Cano. “There’s no reason for him not to be paid that way.”

Reader Comments and Retorts

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Shame on me for getting riled up over a non-story, but to create an article based on someone speculating that the yankees might not sign Cano b/c "THEY" are more intent on lowering payroll than winning is shocking. Any non yankee who has read an article about the Yankees lowering payroll for '14 is now qualified to comment?

And agree w/ #2 more than #1. I wouldn't cut off negotiating w/ Cano just b/c he asks for an Arod contract. I'd tell him to go out there and find his market value, and then come back to me when he realizes it's not what he thought it was.

And agree w/ #2 more than #1. I wouldn't cut off negotiating w/ Cano just b/c he asks for an Arod contract. I'd tell him to go out there and find his market value, and then come back to me when he realizes it's not what he thought it was.

That's what I basically mean by not negotiating. Just say, "We're not coming close to that. Give us a call if you want to discuss something in the 5-6 year range".

The extension that Kinsler signed is 5/75. Keeping in mind that Cano seems a better bet for consistency going forward, what will he be expecting? The first year of free agency will be his age 31 season, so capping it at 6 years doesn't seem unreasonable. Will he get offers above 6/120, or is that overly frugal?

If by 'good chance' the writer means 'no chance', then sure. Cano may well test the market, and you could argue he is wise to do so to drive his price up, but the Yankees aren't going to let him walk.

And I'm sure Cano wants an Alex Rodriguez contract. I'm also sure the Yankees want to sign him for 3/45 with some team options. Negotiations always start in dreamland and work from there. He'll probably end up with somewhere around 7/150-160.

Essentially, the effects of the two most recent CBAs - revenue sharing, the luxury tax, caps on drafting and the international markets - have resulted in a net effect of forcing teams to lock up their own players, sometimes years before their current deals are up. See, e.g., Tulowitzky, Braun, and Longoria, who were signed to extensions many years out long before their current deals were up. It's better to go that route - to bank on a young star contributing for the next decade - than to sign the Victorinos and Crawfords and Werths and Napolis.

Free agency is dead. Yes, some stars will still hit it while in or just past their prime, but relatively few, and it simply is not something teams can bank on as a method for building. That's why the "Oh, next year's free agency class will include X, Y, and Z stars" columns are silly.

Free agency is dead. Yes, some stars will still hit it while in or just past their prime, but relatively few, and it simply is not something teams can bank on as a method for building. That's why the "Oh, next year's free agency class will include X, Y, and Z stars" columns are silly.

This is an overstatement. The huge deals that the few star FA's attain will entice some of the other impending free agents to not sign extensions prematurely. E.G. Felix Hernandez and Cano might look at the huge sums of money that Ryan Braun and Jered Weaver are missing out on in comparison to the deals that Hamilton and Greinke get.

It's better to go that route - to bank on a young star contributing for the next decade - than to sign the Victorinos and Crawfords and Werths and Napolis.

I don't think that is a new thing. It has always been better to develop superstars of your own rather than pay the premium to bring them in from outside your organization when they are at peak or slightly past. The Nationals didn't choose the Werth method rather than the Braun method - they didn't have a Braun.

Source: "There's a good chance Cano won't stay with the Yankees. There's also a good chance he will stay with the Yankees. There is virtually no chance he retires from baseball to enter the priesthood."

I don't think that is a new thing. It has always been better to develop superstars of your own rather than pay the premium to bring them in from outside your organization when they are at peak or slightly past. The Nationals didn't choose the Werth method rather than the Braun method - they didn't have a Braun.

The "new thing" is extending players who are already under contract for several more years out several more years. Take the Longoria situation:

The Rays had club options on Longoria from 2014-2016, picked those up, and then signed him through 2022. They had him for 1 more year already plus 3 years at their option, they didn't have to pick up the 2015-2016 options until 11/2014, and yet they picked those up right now and then obligated themselves for 6 more years.

To make my point even clearer: This wasn't a "Hey, you're going to be a free agent in 3 years, let's sign you to a longterm deal now." [The Jon Hart strategy with the Indians in the 90s.] It wasn't "We've got you for 1 more year before you're a free agent again, let's rip up the contract and give you a longer one to avoid free agency."

This was a "You're under contract for 4 more years if we want you. Let's say yes to that now and sign you to a second contract for another 6 years for after this first one expires."

Also, while the superstars might not be available through free agency as much as they used to be, some of them will still be available. Alex Rodriguez was traded in the middle of his huge deal; Adrian Gonzalez never reached free agency but has been available (twice), Justin Upton signed an extension but he is rumored in all kinds of trade talks etc...

If there is such a small free-agent class every year, the concept of "market value" doesn't mean much, right?

There is still a market price implied in all the pre-FA contracts that are signed. They are good for a lower bound as is, and it shouldn't be too hard to make an estimate of what kind of discount they contain, especially if you have a sample of players signing contracts at varying times before they hit free agency..

This was a "You're under contract for 4 more years if we want you. Let's say yes to that now and sign you to a second contract for another 6 years for after this first one expires."

Of all people, Ryan Howard might have been the first one. The Phils already had him under contract for 10-11 but signed him for 12-16 in April 2010 anyway. Oops.

As to the death of free agency ... to quote Frank Zappa (on jazz): it's not dead, it just smells funny. It's certainly true that it will be a pretty dead market over the next 5+ years because almost everybody great is tied up. But it seems tome that most of these long-term deals are at relatively bargain prices* and, if that continues, then eventually more will take the risk and go FA. Certainly the MLBPA isn't going to sit idly by and watch players get a declining share of revenue but it looks to me (without seeing the books or telling the future of course) that will be the case if this continues (along with draft restrictions, luxury tax, etc).

* However I'll admit it's difficult to tell what is a bargain price (and what is market value) when guys are getting 5-7 year extensions 2-3 years before they're eligible for FA. We need a much better handle on long-term injury/collapse risk. I have little doubt that a healthy Longoria will be worth at least $100 M from 2017-22 (given inflation ... assuming there's anybody left unsigned to drive inflation :-) but I don't have that good of an idea how healthy he'll be in 2017.

* However I'll admit it's difficult to tell what is a bargain price (and what is market value) when guys are getting 5-7 year extensions 2-3 years before they're eligible for FA. We need a much better handle on long-term injury/collapse risk. I have little doubt that a healthy Longoria will be worth at least $100 M from 2017-22 (given inflation ... assuming there's anybody left unsigned to drive inflation :-) but I don't have that good of an idea how healthy he'll be in 2017.

I think a study projecting what value star players at 25 have typically provided from 26-35 would be very useful in analyzing this. I'm sure the teams have done them.

Source: "There's a good chance Cano won't stay with the Yankees. There's also a good chance he will stay with the Yankees. There is virtually no chance he retires from baseball to enter the priesthood."

This source of yours probably said the same thing about Grant Desme, and look what happened to him!

I would argue that something that has evolved over the past 10 years or so, that makes signing very young players to long term deals agreeable to both the players and the teams, is that even the "discounted" salaries guaranteed to folks like Longoria and Pedroia are for so much money that even accepting the "discount" makes you ridiculously set for life.

Compare that to, say, Ozzie Smith. Ozzie was a very well-paid HOFer during his Cardinals days, but even so, the pay wasn't so high that he could simply live off the money without using his brain. (It was reported last week that he selling off lots of his stuff, like Gold Gloves, to raise cash).

I took a quick look at how much money Longoria is guaranteed now, even if the Rays don't pick up his 2023 option - it's over $130 million. Add to that that he's already made abut $8 million in his first four years, and I think a guy like Longoria sits there and says, "Why risk something crazy happening so I can go from, say, $130 million to $200 million?" It's just too much guaranteed money to say no, and the team feels like it is worth the savings to keep a cornerstone player.

I think a study projecting what value star players at 25 have typically provided from 26-35 would be very useful in analyzing this. I'm sure the teams have done them.

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 22 to 25, (requiring onbase_plus_slugging_plus?125 and At least 500 games), sorted by greatest Adjusted OPS+: Results), From Age 26 to 35, sorted by greatest Adjusted OPS+

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 22 to 25, (requiring earned_run_avg_plus?117 and At least 500 Innings Pitched), sorted by greatest Adjusted ERA+: Results), From Age 26 to 35, sorted by greatest Adjusted ERA+

Bob, how about doing that by WAR? Say WAR>12 from 22 to 25 or greater than 9 from 23 to 25. (I'd do it myself but something about how to run a report on a saved report escapes me.)

Using the hitters list, the OPS+ sort hides a few "sins." Strawberry 3200 PA, Burroughs 3500, Lezcano 2200, Hart 1600, Cedeno 4000, Callison 4300. The pitchers' list has plenty of short careers but we expect that plus teams aren't signing their young pitchers to 15-year extensions.

Presumably the "delicate" step in all this is figuring out when to "double down". Buying out arb and FA years is obvious and has been pretty standard practice for a good player since at least the Hart Indians. It's the second extension, years ahead of when it's required, that is the new step.*

Taking some cherry-picked names from the hitter's list:

Dick Allen, personality issues aside, might have gotten the Votto treatment and be signed in Philly through age 40 -- wouldn't have worked out too well. Allen's rookie year was a 162 OPS+ at age 22. At ages 24-25 he put up 181 and 174. He'd have gotten a big arb/FA buyout at 23, through age 28-29. He did miss 40 games at 25 but had 152 games and a 160 OPS+ at 26 to allay any concerns and I'm guessing that's when the extension offer would arrive. Today's comp is Cabrera who got an 8-year extension at age 25. Allen's post-25 WAR was "just" 29. If only signed through 35, that wouldn't be too bad ... if signed through 40, that would be pretty disastrous with them spending about $100 M in today's money for absolutely nothing. By comparison, Cabrera is at 27 WAR in the first 5 years of his deal.

Yaz -- this one is all about timing. If you make the second offer after his age 25-26 seasons, you get a steal. If you wait for age 27, that was 12 WAR, MVP, triple crown, 193 OPS+ and his buyout price is through the roof. If they wait, he definitely gets the Votto treatment. He put up a ridiculous 59 WAR from 26-35. He even tacked on another 12 WAR in the next 5 years. This would have worked out well for the team under any buyout scenario. Modern comp (at young ages) ... Jason Heyward?** Among those already bought out? Ryan Braun?

Cedeno -- Say hello to Mike Trout, v 1.0. 162 OPS+ with 55 steals, a GG and 8 WAR at age 21, roughly repeating that season at age 22. He gets the arb/FA buyout after age 21 (2+ years service time) covering through age 27. Ages 23-25 are definitely a step back but he still puts up over 15 WAR. You've got to double down on that and it's gonna be expensive. Turns out to be a bad idea -- that extension covering ages 28-35 at a cost in the range of $120 to $160 M produces just 9 WAR. Among the buy-outs, Kemp is probably the closest comp but not really.

Santo -- Longoria. That works out fine as the Cubs get 66 WAR for $145 M. But the last 6 years (most of the double down) look pretty ugly at $96 M for 12 WAR.

To simulate the decision teams are making today, it might be better to look at to what extent does performance through age 25/26/27 (when the double down bet is made) predict performance from ages 29-35 (the period covered by the second extension). Most of the guys in that list did really well during those ages although Frank Thomas at 24 WAR over those 7 years is probably about the break-even point (given you're probably talking about money in the $15-20 range and the team wants some discount value). Yount and Raines and double-down candidate Vlad Guerrero fall just below that around 22 WAR. Dawson, Banks (late start), Griffey, McGriff, Belle, Cepeda and W Clark would have been losing bets but not disasters (16-19 WAR). Lynn at 14 WAR is probably where it starts to really hurt, especially if you waited until after his age 27 season to tie him up. I'm guessing they would not have doubled down on Boog anyway but just 12 WAR in those 7 seasons ... but then Mo Vaughn got a nice juicy FA contract for his 11 WAR. Then you get into Cedeno et al.

Tulo's the guy who doesn't really fit into your list. The comps which spring to mind are Ripken and Trammell (because they're white!) and they did quite well at 37 and 32 WAR ages 29-35.

*I keep calling it new because I don't recall it happening before but, I'll be honest, I don't recall the contract history of guys like Bagwell, Biggio, Helton, Chipper. It seems to me that those post-FA extensions were usually signed in the offseason before the last year of their current contract but maybe I'm wrong. Unfortunately Cot's seems to have disappeared Chipper already but Helton's big extension did come in March 01 on a contract that ran through 2002 so maybe it's not as unusual as I think.

** If you ever need reminding about how much baseball has changed since Yaz's day ... his top age 24 b-r comp is Delmon Young.

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 23 to 25, (requiring WAR_bat?9), sorted by greatest WAR Position Players: Results), From Age 26 to 35, sorted by greatest WAR Position Players

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 22 to 25, (requiring WAR_bat?12), sorted by greatest WAR Position Players: Results), From Age 26 to 35, sorted by greatest WAR Position Players

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 25 to 27, (requiring WAR_bat?10), sorted by greatest WAR Position Players: Results), From Age 29 to 35, sorted by greatest WAR Position Players

Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1901 to 2012, For players in the saved report : (Spanning Multiple Seasons or entire Careers, From 1961 to 1994, From Age 25 to 27, (requiring WAR_bat?14.8), sorted by greatest WAR Position Players: Results), From Age 29 to 35, sorted by greatest WAR Position Players